This is how we make energy policy:
A one-sentence provision buried in the Senate's recently passed energy bill, inserted without debate at the urging of the nuclear power industry, could make builders of new nuclear plants eligible for tens of billions of dollars in government loan guarantees.
Lobbyists have told lawmakers and administration officials in recent weeks that the nuclear industry needs as much as $50 billion in loan guarantees over the next two years to finance a major expansion.
PS: the biggest supporter of this boondoggle is a Republican, from the party of small government and free markets. Har.
Two senators push to ramp up nuclear energy
Nuclear companies face reactor design problems, ethics questions
Will South Carolina become the nation’s new Yucca Mountain?
Comments
View as Flat
TheGreenMiles Posted 3:26 am
31 Jul 2007
Subsidies for nuclear power "demonstrate new technology that meets the nation's energy needs."
Everybody clear on that?
Read more of my rants on global warming, recycling, and organic beer at The Green Miles!
Permalink
naturescene Posted 3:57 am
31 Jul 2007
take the politics out of energy.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 4:02 am
31 Jul 2007
Forward!
Permalink
kborgia Posted 4:15 am
31 Jul 2007
The Times article is wrong to ignore the massive effects the loan guarantee program is going to have on renewables.
Further, the LG program was instituted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, not the recent energy bill, and it has never been "buried" by any means. Domenici has publically spoken about this program countless times, and it also has the support of a huge array of lawmakers and environmentalists.
The NY Times is so far off on this article, they should run a correction. It's not a secret, it's not an underhanded way to promote nuclear over renewables, and it's not an irresponsibly-designed program. One would think environmentalists should be shouting this program from the hills for all it could do for renewables and cellulosic biofuels, not decrying it without examining the facts.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 4:24 am
31 Jul 2007
Please don't mention the support for cellulosic biofuels again... "environmentalists" despise cellulosic biofuel almost as much as they despise nuclear power.
Shhhhhh....
Forward!
Permalink
kborgia Posted 4:28 am
31 Jul 2007
Permalink
Laurence Aurbach Posted 5:40 am
31 Jul 2007
Within DOE's FY'08 budget request to guarantee up to $9 billion in loans, DOE has proposed to guarantee $4 billion in loans for central power generation facilities such as nuclear facilities or carbon sequestration optimized coal power plants; $4 billion in loans for projects that promote biofuels and clean transportation fuels; and $1 billion in loans for projects using new technologies for electric transmission facilities or renewable power generation systems.
As I figure it, that's 44% for nuclear and coal; 44% for ethanol, NGL and CTL; and some portion (probably an exceedingly small portion) of 12% for renewables.
Sounds about par for the course. Billions for nukes and fossil fuels, crumbs for renewables.
Ped Shed Blog
Permalink